# The name for this type of logical idea

I don't know if this "idea" would be what's considered to be a mutually inclusive concept, but I don't really know what else to call it.

Basically, what I'm talking about is this: say there were an abstract concept that consisted of, X, Y, and Z properties. Without these properties, the concept wouldn't be considered the same.

Suppose this concept to is represented over a plane or space; one could take out an enormous piece of this abstract concept, or one could take out an extremely tiny piece. I am referring only to the abstract concept as it is represented by space, not the properties of which the abstract concept is composed.

Were I to have the large piece, I still would have the entirety of the abstract concept represented in that piece as well as the remainder of the concept. The same goes for the extremely minute piece; the entirety of the abstract concept is fully and completely represented by the abstract concept.

The only example that I can think of that would exist and is easily imaginable in the real world would be a plane. A plane extends infinitely in a 2-D way. Contained inside the plane are all possible shapes (square, circle, triangle, etc.) an infinite amount of times in an infinite amount of ways.

One could section off part of this plane and call it a rectangle, but that rectangle still carries all shapes inside of it. Were one to destroy this rectangle, one would be destroying an infinite amount of shapes in the same way that, if one were to destroy the entire plane, one would be destroying all of the shapes. However, were one to destroy this rectangle, one would be destroying all of the shapes inside of it; but that doesn't mean that all of the shapes are destroyed, since the shapes still exist infinitely outside of the rectangle.

What would be the name of such a concept: where, regardless of what is taken out of the concept as represented by space, the composition of the concept fully remains intact?

• It is hard to imagine what are you sugegsting with "an enormous piece of or an extremely tiny piece of" an abstract concept ... Usually, we think at a concept as made of simpler ones (properties ?). Maybe absolute... Commented Oct 2, 2016 at 16:55
• Infinitely divisible? Commented Oct 2, 2016 at 21:14
• "mutually inclusive concept" doesn't make much sense to me. mutuality implies plurality. can you clarify?
– user20153
Commented Oct 2, 2016 at 22:39
• @MauroALLEGRANZA. What I mean by that is really, the embodiment of an abstract concept in something tangible. For example, a sidewalk has the concept of flatness attributable to it, however, were there no sidewalk, "flatness" wouldn't be able to exist. Commented Oct 11, 2016 at 20:31
• @mobileink By mutually inclusive concept, I mean, for example, that X property exists within Z property and, at the same time, Z property exists within X property. In that way, they are really the same property. Commented Oct 11, 2016 at 20:36